Xiang et al. reply.

H J Xiang,Bing Huang,Erjun Kan,Su-Huai Wei,X G Gong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.112.199802

IF: 8.6

2014-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by M. Amsler et al.Received 4 December 2013DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.199802© 2014 American Physical Society

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Gao et al. Reply

Hong-Jun Gao,Karl Sohlberg,Z. Q. Xue,H. Y. Chen,S. M. Hou,L. P. Ma,X. W. Fang,Stephen J. Pennycook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.87.179707

IF: 8.6

2001-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Yanming Zhao et al.Received 2 June 2001DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.179707©2001 American Physical Society
Qin Et Al. Reply

Nan Qin,Emmanuelle Le Chatelier,Jing Guo,Edi Prifti,Lanjuan Li,S. Dusko Ehrlich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14852

IF: 64.8

2015-01-01

Nature

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by J. H. Chen and H. Y. Fan.Received 22 May 2013DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.269502© 2013 American Physical Society
Zu et al. reply:.

C Zu,Y-X Wang,D-L Deng,X-Y Chang,K Liu,P-Y Hou,H-X Yang,L-M Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.110.078902

IF: 8.6

2013-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by E. Amselem et al.Received 4 December 2012DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.078902© 2013 American Physical Society
Yanet Al.reply:

X. Q. Yan,C. Lin,Z. M. Sheng,Z. Y. Guo,B. C. Liu,Y. R. Lu,J. X. Fang,J. E. Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.102.239502

IF: 8.6

2009-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Liangliang Ji et al..Received 13 February 2009DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.239502©2009 American Physical Society
Houet Al.reply:

D. M. Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.85.2654

IF: 8.6

2000-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by J. I. Pascual, et al.Received 10 May 2000DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.2654©2000 American Physical Society
Chen, Gong, and Wei Reply:

Shiyou Chen,X. G. Gong,Su-Huai Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.99.159602

IF: 8.6

2007-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Changfeng Chen and Hong Sun.Received 30 May 2007DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.159602©2007 American Physical Society
Zhu et al. Reply:

Xin-Yang Zhu,Shi Wang,Zhen-Yu Jia,Li Zhu,Qi-Yuan Li,Wei-Min Zhao,Cheng-Long Xue,Yong-Jie Xu,Zhen Ma,Jinsheng Wen,Shun-Li Yu,Jian-Xin Li,Shao-Chun Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.125.079702

IF: 8.6

2020-08-13

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Zhu et al.

physics, multidisciplinary
Yaoet Al.reply:

Ke Yao,Martin Andersson,Tomas Brage,Roger Hutton,Per Jönsson,Yaming Zou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.104.209602

IF: 8.6

2007-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Thad G. Walker and Charles J. Goebel.Received 5 February 2007DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.269304©2007 American Physical Society
Zhanget Al.reply:

Hui Zhang,Jin-Ho Choi,Yang Xu,Xiuxia Wang,Xiaofang Zhai,Bing Wang,Changgan Zeng,Jun-Hyung Cho,Zhenyu Zhang,J. G. Hou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.107.019702

IF: 8.6

2011-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Han Woong Yeom and Tae-Hwan Kim.Received 5 May 2011DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.019702© 2011 American Physical Society
Wexleret Al.reply:

Carlos Wexler,D. J. Thouless,Ping Ao,Qian Niu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.81.4277

IF: 8.6

1998-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by E. B. Sonin.Received 9 September 1998DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.4277©1998 American Physical Society
Dong and Li Reply

J. K. Dong,Shiyan Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.104.259702

IF: 8.6

2010-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by Taichi Terashima et al.Received 14 May 2010DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.259702©2010 American Physical Society
Tang, Feng, and Golubovic Reply:

Chao Tang,Shechao Feng,Leonardo Golubovic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.74.3500

IF: 8.6

1995-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by E. H. Brandt.Received 27 January 1995DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.3500©1995 American Physical Society
Linet Al.reply:

Lin Liu,Hsin‐Fei Meng,Jow-Tsong Shy,Sheng-Fu Horng,L. S. Yu,C. H. Chen,H. H. Liaw,Chun-Ming Huang,Kang‐Yung Peng,S. A. Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.92.059702

IF: 8.6

2004-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by M. Schott.Received 29 October 2003DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.059702©2004 American Physical Society
Wonet Al.reply:

C. Won,Y. Z. Wu,N. Kurahashi,H. W. Zhao,Z. Q. Qiu,A. Scholl,A. Doran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.94.039704

IF: 8.6

2005-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Reply to the Comment by P. J. Jensen et al.Received 19 March 2004DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.039704©2005 American Physical Society
Comment on the Comment on Deformation of Quantum-Mechanics

YQ LI,ZM SHENG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0253-6102/24/3/384

1995-01-01

Communications in Theoretical Physics

Abstract:This is a reply to the comment by Chung and Chung [J. Phys. A27 (1994) 5037]. We point out that the discussion there is imperfect.
Comment on “berry Phase in a Composite System”

Lin‐Hai Han,Yong Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.100.168901

IF: 8.6

2008-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:A Comment on the Letter by X. X. Yi, L. C. Wang, and T. Y. Zheng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 150406 (2004). The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.Received 2 April 2007DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.168901©2008 American Physical Society
Reply to the comment "quant-ph/9710002"

Lu-Ming Duan,Guang-Can Guo

1997-01-01

Abstract:In the comment, Zanardi and Rasetti argue that several claims in our recent letter (Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1953, 1997) are questionable. The reply shows these claims remain true.
Xiaoet Al.reply:

Di Xiao,Junren Shi,Qian Niu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.96.099702

IF: 8.6

2006-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:The Comment by Duval et al. [PRL 96, 099701 (2006)] addresses an important, but not the main, result of our Letter [PRL 95, 137204 (2005)]. It does not contradict our results in substance, and the only objection is really on the style of approach.
Sinha and Amaratunga Reply:

Dhiräj Sinha,G.A.J. Amaratunga

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.115.119702

IF: 8.6

2015-01-01

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:Received 6 August 2015DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.119702© 2015 American Physical Society
Reply to the Comment, <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0810.3243v1" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3243v1">arXiv:0810.3243v1</a> by B. Geyer, G. L. Klimchitskaya, U. Mohideen, and. V. M. Mostepanenko

L. P. Pitaevskii

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0811.3081

2008-11-19

Abstract:It is shown that criticism of my paper <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0801.0656" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0656">arXiv:0801.0656</a> Phys. Rev. Lett, vol. 101, 163202 (2008) by the authors of Comment <a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0810.3243v1" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.3243v1">arXiv:0810.3243v1</a> is wrong and that their main arguments are in contradiction with established concepts of statistical physics.

Statistical Mechanics